“We have legislators drafting bills who have no idea how firearms work or any sense of firearm nomenclature,” Fortunato said. “When decision makers want to restrict someone’s constitutional rights, they shouldn’t go off half-cocked.” [More]I have mixed feelings about this.
On the one hand, do we really want them actually knowledgeable and thus able to craft less-challengeable legislation?
On the other hand, they'll vote it down and demonstrate to all that remaining ignorant is a major part of their agenda.
[Via CDT]
2 comments:
Next, we'll expect them to be able to show they can balance their own checkbook before we allow them to vote on budgets and appropriations.
Remember when Harry Truman was derided for being "just" a haberdasher? At least the man knew how to make change without needing a cash register to tell him how to do it.
Are we really sure that they're as ignorant about guns, or the constitutCon, as they appear?
But more importantly, what does their clear choice to remain ignorant about guns suggest about their full intentions?
I mean, does anyone really believe that the jackals have a need for meaningful conversations with the subjective prey they intend to kill and devour?
Post a Comment